Slashdot Mirror
Synthetic Chromosomes Successfully Integrated Into Brewer's Yeast
New submitter dunnomattic writes: "Researchers at New York University School of Medicine have achieved a milestone in synthetic biology. A fully synthetic yeast chromosome, dubbed 'synIII,' has successfully replaced chromosome 3 of multiple living yeast cells. The researchers pieced together over 250,000 nucleotide bases to accomplish this feat. Dr. Jef Boeke, the lead author of the study, says, 'not only can we make designer changes on a computer, but we can make hundreds of changes through a chromosome and we can put that chromosome into yeast and have a yeast that looks, smells and behaves like a regular yeast, but this yeast is endowed with special properties that normal yeasts don't have.' Work is underway (abstract) to synthesize the remaining 15 chromosomes."
One giant leap for Synthehol.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
1) Metabolize human flesh
2) Able to more easily spread via airborne routes
3) Increase growth exponent
4) Secrete nerve gas
5) Infinite life span
that the first application of creating designer genes is super-beer.
... is how the zombie apocalypse begins, with mutant yeast in our beer. I have an idea for the first brand: Coorpse Light.
So, no super speed, or strength, or other abilities, no synthesizer music.
For our $6,000,000, all we get is a "yeast endowed with special properties other yeasts don't have"? This will not make a compelling television drama. Perhaps a bland sitcom, but not much more.
Take it to the limit, everybody to the limit, come on, everybody fhqwhgads.
Oh lord, the Luddites are bad enough with "normal" genetically engineered foods. I hate to imagine the kind of outcry they're do for this.
Synthetic biology is the design and construction of biological devices and systems for useful purposes.
Free softwares
polymorph man
Who will your decedents become?
I have some experience in the field of invasive, noxious weeds.
My complaint is that Herr Doktor Frankenstein has chosen to perform his fiendish experiments with a creature so adept at aerosol migration and insinuation.
Just sayin'.
They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
This story could be the basis for the second remake of The Blob (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0051418/)!
Circle the wagons and fire inward. Entropy increases without bounds.
Take a huge program and hey... lets change this little part and see what happens/
Really, beer is one of mans' small pleasures. Why mess with the constituent ingredients. While not a snob overall, I do only tend to purchase high-quality beers because they are actually better.
It's bad enough that water has become something to be sold, but leave our beer alone.
Luddite here. The human species is an interesting animal. Despite our desires to see ourselves as independent thinkers, we really just follow the crowd. That's my concern when it comes to generic engineering. Aside from the nightmare scenarios where someone decides to create a generically modified shark with human-like intelligence (poor shark!), there's the more mundane threat where we make it easy for parents to decide on their child's genetic makeup. Like potatoes in Ireland that caused the famine. Most potatoes during the famine were Irish Lumpers, a single variety and were susceptible to a disease that was devastating. Because there was a lack of genetic variety, Ireland's whole potato crop was devastated.
When we're able to determine our children's generic make up so easily, I fear our children will one day be a monoculture unto themselves so that when a deadly virus hits, we all die. Don't believe me? Take a poll of children's names. When I was younger, you couldn't swing a cat without hitting a girl names Ashely ( or Ashley).
...welcome our new genetically engineered super-yeast overlords. May they raise our bread to new heights - like 40 feet in the air maybe...
Is anyone else thinking this could lead to some interest new craft beers?
From Wiki-Book (TM) edited by eco-beer-friendly: 10:24am August 16, 2056
"In a statement released Wednesday, Dr. Curtis Shmeckler, current head of the FDA, and former head of the International Brewers Association, stated that 'the long and sustained efforts to quash patent and copyright infringers of our commercial yeast offerings, seems to have taken a most terrifying unexpected turn'. Efforts by commercial, independent, and ameteur brewers to re-kindle a viable yeast for widespread beer production are now underway. Early tests are not promising though, and show that unexpected side-effects from decades long sustained pesticide use, seems to have removed almost all natural fermentation yeast from the eco-system."
via the Associated Press
Why is it when anyone brings up a criticism or a potential problem that technology may cause, they are labeled a "Luddite"?
Technology is not always good (Hydrogen Bomb) and sometimes causes social problems that will cause quite a bit of adjustment and suffering (automation and the fact that other industries are not absorbing all the displaced workers as happened 175 years ago.)
Going in half-cocked without planning for the possible ramifications causes more problems down the road and turns people off to the new technology - resulting in irrational bans. Sometimes you cannot plan for the future (no one really knew how devastating the atom bombs would truly be on all accounts - sorry, a desert test doesn't cut it).
When we start manipulating genes, there is always a cost. Somewhere down the line there will be a cost - super strong crops end up with super strong weeds.
All of the consequences cannot be foreseen and therefore; makes a cost benefit analysis impractical.
Should we stop? No. Absolutely NOT. For another technology example: even though we have super bugs out there now, I would NEVER wish for penicillin to not have been invented.
What we need to do is take it slow. Let's not rush in and use our new toy - genetic engineering. Let us go slow, learn, and increase our wisdom.
Here we go down yet another scary thing to worry about... Synthetic life wow?
I think it will become an action series: the Six Million Dollar Yeast.
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
I can protect my self from you by rubbing Monistat all over my body.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Folksâ¦leave our food and drink alone eh?
Please�
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Well, not just THC or other cannibinoids. Antibiotics (that don't kill yeast, anyway). Other drugs. Gasoline. Biodiesel. Name your poison, find the gene sequence that can do it, splice it into yeast the way they are already doing it with so many other microorganisms (e.g. e. coli., chlorella, etc).
But (as a beer maker) -- yeast that synthesizes THC directly into the wort as it works, no actual hemp plants needed, no expensive grow lights, no hidden greenhouse or plot in the middle of the woods, no need to smoke or vaporize, no actual taste (compared to the already sublime taste of barley and hops) -- slightly scary idea, actually. And it would make it so VERY difficult to maintain the prohibition on cannibinoids. I've long wondered how long it will take for some enterprising molecular biologist to splice THC production into tomatoes or corn (where it might have an actual evolutionary advantage as a pest repellant!) but I never dreamed of brewer's yeast. Bread yeast is almost the same thing (very close cousins)! Bread will never be the same!
rgb
Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
To the person who commented that those who don't like GMO will freak out.
Think about this.
A modified yeast which creates an antibiotic or survives in higher alcohol concentrations or (insert your own scenario) escapes into the wild and displaces "normal" yeast. What then?
This is great news but let's have a look at the risks.
work in progress
Those folks will put anything in a beer....and make some fascinating brews!
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
coming true.
http://msgboard.snopes.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=76;t=000176;p=0
A better candidate for sneaking THC into beer would be a GMO hop variety, as hops are the closest botanical relative to Cannabis.
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
Now life can be created in minutes.
You can download YADA from sourceforge.net.
The GUI interface allows you to drag an drop and build for example luminescent marijuana plant that also contain caffeine.
don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
Tastes the future! Welcome to new synthetic flavours: Vin de Nylon, Vin de Phenolic, Cellulose Stout, Polyester Malt, Acrylic Vodka...
Already done.
They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
The original yeast had 50,000 copies of the chromosome which were discarded, replacing them with just a single copy of it because they were deemed irrelevant, and when the yeast remained alive it was called "hardy". IANA biochemist but still, one might think 50,000 copies could have an advantage as if cellular processes were to hit them randomly and transparently (like 50,000 disks in a RAID mirror where you don't know which physical disk was actually accessed) then a mutation in one copy would have 50,000 times less chance of hurting the cell. That the cell remains alive only means that in the hours it took for cell division to be proven no mutations occurred, but instead of this meaning the cell is hardy it could actually be 50,000 times more susceptible to mutation or other Bad Things.
Another possibility is that there are very subtle differences among the 50,000 copies, perhaps in just a small number of genes, among which the cell could switch in the event of environmental change, or it could even encode information "learned" over the course of evolution by the strain. Switch to this copy if you are being attacked by this pathogen, or if you see a lot of this nutrient around you, etc. Again this would be the definition of "hardy" so the scientist again would be wrong. Of course this is just a layman's view, have not read the paper, they probably don't care, etc. Anybody with a degree care to comment?
You should refer to a dictionary regarding the origin of the term "Luddites", because I don't think it correctly describes those you are poorly attempting to bash.
For years science has been filling my grocery bags with artifical colors/flavors, aspartame, hydrogenated oils, preservatives, high fructose corn syrup, etc. Why should I trust them now?
Now I can make this http://youtu.be/ebfLWAB8bY4