Slashdot Mirror


Scientists Reawaken Cells From a 28,000-Year-Old Mammoth (vice.com)

Cells from a woolly mammoth that died more than 28,000 years ago have been partially reactivated inside of mouse egg cells, according to a study published Monday in Scientific Reports. "The achievement shows that biological activity can be induced in the cells of long-dead creatures, but that does not mean that scientists will be resurrecting extinct animals like mammoths any time soon," reports Motherboard. From the report: A team led by Kazuo Yamagata, a biologist at Kindai University in Japan, extracted cells from the remains of "Yuka," a young female mammoth discovered in 2010 on the coast of the Dmitry Laptev Strait in the Russian Far East. Yuka was entombed in permafrost, a frozen ground layer that can often keep the skin, fur, brains, and other softer tissues of dead animals intact. Because Yuka is in particularly great condition, Yamagata's team was able to extract 88 nucleus-like structures from her preserved muscle tissues. The mammoth cells were implanted into mouse oocytes, which are ovarian cells involved in embryonic development. The researchers also implanted elephant cells into mouse eggs to provide a control sample.

Once the cell nuclei were incubated, they seemed to reawaken -- but only slightly. The cells did not divide, but completed some steps that precede cell division. For instance, the mammoth nuclei performed a process called "spindle assembly," which ensures that chromosomes are correctly attached to microscopic spindle structures before a parent cell breaks into two daughter cells. The fact that Yuka's cells were able to spring back into partial action is both an exciting and challenging development for scientists interested in cloning extinct animals. On one hand, some degree of cellular reactivation is clearly possible. But Yuka is also an exceptionally pristine specimen, and even her cells were not able to complete cell division -- a major hurdle that scientists must clear to accomplish de-extinction.

38 of 82 comments (clear)

  1. Fortune Favors the Bold by Kunedog · · Score: 3, Funny

    Next Step: Mouse pregnant with mammoth embryo.

    1. Re:Fortune Favors the Bold by Brooklynoid · · Score: 2

      I hope they're planning on a C-section for Mama Mouse.

    2. Re:Fortune Favors the Bold by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 2

      Next Step: Mouse pregnant with mammoth embryo.

      That will be awkward when the baby Mammoth is born and opens its eyes for the first time seeing it's stretched out momma and gets imprinted.

      Mammoth will think it's a mouse and try mating with mice when it grows up. Hopefully the Mammoth is a girl, because I don't think a mammoth penis will fit in a female mouse.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    3. Re:Fortune Favors the Bold by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Congrats! It's a mamouse.

    4. Re:Fortune Favors the Bold by mysticgoat · · Score: 2

      Dr Foglio and the Girl Genius say that the result would be a "mimoth".

    5. Re:Fortune Favors the Bold by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Phil and Dixie?

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    6. Re: Fortune Favors the Bold by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      They're playing with fire, I tell you. Seen Legend?? That's nothing; imagine the Earth overrun with mice... with the strength of mammoths!

  2. Dr Ian Malcolm said it best by CeasedCaring · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should..."

    1. Re:Dr Ian Malcolm said it best by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2

      He also said a lot of other things.
      "You will fail because chaos"
      - "I don't get..."
      "CHAOS! Oh and also hubris"
      Certainly one of the more insufferable characters in movie history (and not at all like the guy in the book)

      And in this case, of course they should. Whether they should proceed to build an ill-conceived (and rather lame) theme park with extinct animals is another matter.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    2. Re:Dr Ian Malcolm said it best by jabuzz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If they had just built a reinforced concrete wall to separate the zones of the park and put the ride a top it on a monorail there would have been no issue.

    3. Re:Dr Ian Malcolm said it best by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      Certainly one of the more insufferable characters in movie history (and not at all like the guy in the book)

      Let's not forget David Levinson from Independence Day.

    4. Re: Dr Ian Malcolm said it best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Don't you pick on my boy like that. None of you would be here of it weren't for him. You knew. Back in the 60s. You knew then this was possible.

    5. Re:Dr Ian Malcolm said it best by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      In many ways we have been brainwashed into the Warning from Science Fiction, where we relate the experiments to the dystopia that causes many Science Fiction stories.
      Genetic Engineering in Science Fiction will lead to monsters, plagues, and KAHNNN!!! KAhnnn!! Kahnn! ann n. Cloning creates doppelgangers, and species of animals that seem well adapted to an environment that is much different to what they were evolved for. AI will always deem mankind is unnecessary and should be destroyed...

      Real science is much more dull. As well most scientists goal is is get published, so they will have to go under peer review, including ethical review.
      Just recently the Chinese Scientist who Genetically modified a human baby with HIV resistance who is being born from a mother with HIV, was in essence ousted from the scientific community, for ethics violations.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    6. Re:Dr Ian Malcolm said it best by meta-monkey · · Score: 2

      And in this case, of course they should.

      You say that now, but wait until you're getting eaten alive by a genetically engineered mammoth.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    7. Re:Dr Ian Malcolm said it best by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Those stories are how we process our possible future well in advance. The reason the dystopias never come to pass is specifically because everything has been explored far in advance by fiction. If you think Asimov's fictional 3 laws had no influence on Tesla's pseudo-self-driving cars, you're ignoring a lot.

    8. Re:Dr Ian Malcolm said it best by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      "Life, uh... finds a way." - Dr. Ian Malcolm

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    9. Re:Dr Ian Malcolm said it best by Diakoneo · · Score: 1

      “Oh, yeah. Oooh, ahhh, that’s how it always starts. Then later there’s running and screaming.”

      --
      "Just as there is nothing so unreal as reality TV, there is nothing as unsocial as social media." - Alistair Dabbs
    10. Re:Dr Ian Malcolm said it best by jabuzz · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I don't think a herbivore is likely to eat a human. On the other hand you might get trampled by them.

  3. Re: Life & cells is just chemistry by mrbester · · Score: 2

    > there is no "quickening"...

    Juan Villa-Lobosh Ramireszh would dishagree.

    --
    "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
  4. Re:Start taking samples now by DarkOx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Probably because just cranking out endangered species would not really solve the problem. Most of them are endangered due to habitat destruction. Yes there are some exceptions like Wolves in North America where over hunting is to blame. There would be no point for example in release a bunch of endangered cats in Asia with no way for them to eek out a living.

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
  5. Re:Start taking samples now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I honestly don't know why we aren't already "manufacturing" endangered species.

    Because it is expensive. Do you volunteer to fund it?

  6. Re:Sorry, no by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    It would impress me, but far less than the mouse who can give birth to a woolly mammoth!

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  7. It Begins by Only+Time+Will+Tell · · Score: 4, Funny

    Maiya looked out wistfully over the horizon at the valley below. She leaned heavily on her walking stick carved from a mammoth shin bone and pulled back her sabertoothed tiger cowl. What changes this valley had seen over the past few decades. A few paces back, her son finally caught up with her and joined her in the view. "What was it like before they resurrected all the dinosaurs and ancient animals?" Maiya sighed heavily, eying the overgrowth that had swallowed a city that used to be called 'L.A.' She could hear in the distance the howls and screams of something fighting for its life. "Well, for one, we stepped in a lot less T-Rex shit."

  8. Re:I'm going to sleep by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

    You can reawaken me after 28000 years.

    You think 28,000 years is long enough- but when you awake they'll still be singing "baby shark" and you'll immediately go back to sleep again.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  9. Cells have been reactivated inside of "mouse eggs" by grep+-v+'.*'+* · · Score: 1

    Cells from a woolly mammoth that died more than 28,000 years ago have been partially reactivated inside of mouse egg cells

    BRAINZZZZZ .... and cheese.

    So, errr, like, what do you use -- a mousetrap? A mammoth trap? And it kills them? But, but they're already dead.

    More like you'd get 'em more pissed than they were already. A mammoth-sized mouse is now upset with you. And here you thought your day was bad enough already.

    --
    If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
  10. Re:Jurassic Park by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No it is Holocene Park.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  11. Reawakening or preserving by kalpol · · Score: 1

    It seems to me from this experiment they will learn a whole lot more about how to preserve cells for a long period of time than how to reawaken them.

    --
    12:50 - press return.
  12. Only the young females ... by Laxator2 · · Score: 1

    ... get to be desirable, even when it comes to reviving mammoths. After all, what would be the point of reviving an old male ?

    1. Re:Only the young females ... by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      After all, what would be the point of reviving an old male ?

      More ivory ?

  13. Re:Start taking samples now by omnichad · · Score: 1

    These cats are frightening.

  14. And just like that... by Kinthelt · · Score: 1

    The mouse became scared of itself.

    --

    "Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Dark Helmet (Spaceballs)

  15. Re:Cells have been reactivated inside of "mouse eg by GungaDan · · Score: 1

    "A mammoth-sized mouse"

    The rodents of unusual size? I don't believe they exist.

    --
    Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
  16. The race is on by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Will the world end in Parasite Eve, Skynet, or Heavy Weather?

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  17. Next steps by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    Finally someone has made exciting advancements in the field. I propose we being to pool efforts to advance this quickly due to it's amazing medical applications. We can start by putting all the scientists in one major facility and managing them under a single Umbrella Corporation.

    1. Re:Next steps by es330td · · Score: 1

      Assuming you aren't joking, this is a terrible idea. In all fields, the universe progresses through competition. Always has, always will. Removing competition will only slow progress.

    2. Re:Next steps by es330td · · Score: 1

      My bad. Thanks for the clarification.

  18. Impossible? hurdles by alleycat0 · · Score: 2

    De-extinction is rife with seemingly intractable problems. Going to locate and clone a sufficient number of unique preserved specimens to avoid inbreeding? What about reproducing its entire exterior/interior microbiome - especially the essential gut flora?

    --
    I am not a number - I am a free man!
    1. Re:Impossible? hurdles by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      De-extinction is rife with seemingly intractable problems.

      ... most of which are ethical rather than about the possibility of the procedure.

      Going to locate and clone a sufficient number of unique preserved specimens to avoid inbreeding?

      If you've developed a technique, you will almost certainly already have tried a variety of samples from a variety of sources before you get one which works. So when you've found a solution that works, you try it on the previous samples which didn't work with different techniques. As long as you produce a second, preferably female, specimen before the first (also preferably female - you can probably do a parthenogenetic tweak with two females more easily than with two males) one dies, then you've got the basis of an expanding population. The amount of new genetic material you need to introduce into a small, significantly inbred population in order to forestall major problems is lower than people think. (Non-artificial reintroductions of predators in several locations have shown this, to some people's surprise.)

      What about reproducing its entire exterior/interior microbiome - especially the essential gut flora?

      That would almost certainly be desirable. Which is a different thing to necessary.

      Giving Specimen #1 and #2 gut flora from the closest living relative (probably the surrogate mother's species, even if you had to do a premature Caesarian before the infant killed the mother) would probably be a good enough start. Give #3 a gut flora from another relative then letting the three run together (and cross-contaminate ; alternatively, move fresh dung from one enclosure to another) would allow internal natural selection do what it's good at.

      But you've still got to recreate something resembling a working environment for them to live in. Otherwise it's a tour de force of genetics, good advertising, and fuck all good for the animals. Ethical problems.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"