Slashdot Mirror
Xeroxed Gene May Have Paved the Way For Large Human Brain
sciencehabit writes Last week, researchers expanded the size of the mouse brain by giving rodents a piece of human DNA. Now another team has topped that feat, pinpointing a human gene that not only grows the mouse brain but also gives it the distinctive folds found in primate brains. The work suggests that scientists are finally beginning to unravel some of the evolutionary steps that boosted the cognitive powers of our species. "This study represents a major milestone in our understanding of the developmental emergence of human uniqueness," says Victor Borrell Franco, a neurobiologist at the Institute of Neurosciences in Alicante, Spain, who was not involved with the work.
On Algernons grave
-Charlie
... will finally take over the world.
It's a bugger when the species you genetically engineered to solve complex mathematical equations starts experimenting on your brain.
Look, I'm all about the advancement of science and human knowledge, but this feels like the neurobiological version of "Hold my beer and watch this." I'm sure it seemed like a good idea at the time, science people, but when our new rodent masters (who I, of course, welcome) enslave the human race and bring about Planet of the Apes: Mickey Mouse Edition maybe you'll be a bit more careful next time.
Finally, "The Brain" will be a reality. The cartoon was prescient in its detail.
I don't care for this new UI. What I really don't care for though, is the increase in cross-site javascript. I've been using Slashdot since it had no client-side scripting, and it worked just fine without any javascript at all.
I think that Slashdot/Dice is telling me that it's time to get off the computer and go out and live my life in the real world again. Perhaps I should listen.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
The "Reply to This" button and the end of the comments are mashing together. So now beta is beta, but original is the new alpha?
...welcome our new hyperintelligent mouse overlords.
Not really. The image I have is of an isolated village in the south seas fruitlessly building runways.
Required reading for internet skeptics
.. are we going to try this on turtles next?
Slashdot programmers would be my vote. That way if they screw it up, nothing of any value would be lost.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
lol, yeah, that's what I was thinking, they must be doing this research at NIMH!
"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem." -- Jefferson
Xeroxing has become a seriously anachronistic term. Believe it or not, the target audience does know words like "duplicate" or "copy", but younger generations exposure to the "Xerox" company is very limited. Let that word die please.
You mean photocopied or something having to do with a registered trademark? Why not simply "Copied".
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
The concept of "co-opting" genetic material is old news. It was a key argument in the Behe Dover trial over Irreducible Complexity, which itself devolved into straw man attacks and false claims made about research papers. http://www.discovery.org/a/142... This article also elaborates on the over simplification in defining "genetic material", and is a good start in understanding why genetic co-opting isn't a widely accepted theory.
One key problem with any mutation, including attempts to explain new genetic material via "co-opting", is that sexually reproducing organisms are usually governed by hereditary traits. An example of this is seen in White Tigers, in that they must be inbred to continue the mutation. Any complex sexually reproducing organism that experiences a significant mutation that then breeds back with the general population that does not share that mutation will create hybrids and usually see the mutation "bred out" in a very few generations. This has led researchers to look for things like ways that several of a species could express suppressed genes simultaneously so that a sufficient population mutated simultaneously to eliminate the problems with "breeding out" a mutation and still avoid the problems from inbreeding. Thus regardless of where and how a mutation gets its genetic material, hereditary traits still present a barrier to that mutation continuing, especially with more extreme mutations.
Actual genetic research is far beyond what is mentioned with the monkey brain, but it's still interesting that such a forced mutation could have such dramatic effects on a primate.
Yes, it's really so hard to believe.
Denisova hominins and Neandertals are distinct, and separate from Homo Erectus. As well as Homo Sapiens.
You should stop talking about anything related to this in public, or risk extreme mocking.
How did we get from nothing to lower primates? I would posit that this is where the magic happened. Primates to humans was largely a bit of chance, but it could be easily replicated given many many years from tool inventing primates.
Could we make other animals smarter before we create AI? Wow! that would be interesting. Imagine, "an ape just took your job".
Well you should be congratulated on your omniscience... I'm sure it was well earned.
Who are we going to do first, the chimps or the dolphins?
happen to be named Moreau?
What advanced intelligence?
It would be more interesting to do it with a larger animal with a bigger brain. Could you raise an elephant that was smarter than people?
*Pauses, looks at Congress.*
Never mind. Already there.
"Hey, we found Pandora's Box! Let's crack that sucker open!"
I don't think anyone gets your point and what is kethup?
It's more like "Flowers for Algernon's Baby" - especially if you want to mix in more Elder Worlds horror than the original story's rather cerebral horror had.
Can these enhancements enable the rat to learn the art of Ninjutsu?
With Jerry, Fievel Mousekewitz, Elizabeth Brisby, and others, who needs Mickey Mouse?
I will welcome our rodent overlords as our saviors from the robot overlords mentioned earlier this week.
We can do a tremendous variety of things with our hands. Witness my typing for an example of the incredibly sophisticated and dextrous manipulation of my physical environment that I can effect with training and practice (especially considering how crappy the keyboard on my laptop is). I think that having a large terminal bundle of neurons is great, but you have to be able to do a lot of different things with it in order to learn to be a good learner.
One thing I have spent some time pondering: creatures that have stepped up to higher cognitive plateaus live in more 3-dimensional environments. For instance, horses and cows basically live on surfaces that we can hike, whereas our ancestors lived in forest canopies. Dolphins live in several different levels of aquatic environments. Birds get full overhead space, but they are hampered by weight considerations.