The scoop is that eukaryotes, like plants/animas/yeast/etc.---in other words, the more complex organisms that we see around us---are older than previously thought, 2.7 billion years instead 1.7 billion. The simpler prokaryotes like bacteria are still thought to have originated between 3.5 and 3.8 billion years ago. See the New York Times article for a better scoop. (free login required) -zook
c'mon, don't be too quick to dismiss
on
Gene Leakage
·
· Score: 1
Just a few points that I think could be missed:
I think that Prof. Jones is probably on target when he says that it's unlikely that genetically modified food is harmful eat. Most of the modifications made to plants involve inserting naturally occuring genes into one plant or another to convey resistances, improve yield, etc. The question of whether these things are harmful is pretty much the same question we have to answer for any food. I mean, is corn good for you? It is a vegetable, but it's also quite high in fat. Neither naturally occuring corn, nor modified corn will kill you outright, but there may be side concerns to worry about.
It seems quite concievable that these genes could be transfered from one species to another. Although two distantly related plants would not be able to share this information directly, there are alternate pathways by which genetic information could move across species. The issue of penicillin resistance is not just a case of convergent evolution among bacteria, but also involves the fact that bacteria redily conjugate, or trade DNA pieces. Furthermore, there are both viruses and bacteria that permanently change the DNA of the host organism by inserting a pice of genetic information into the hosts genomic DNA. It isn't that far fetched to imagine a case in which DNA was removed from one species and put into another by such a mechanism.
Finally, if we engineer a plant to be resistant to some insect parasite, it is true that things like polination should not be affected. But we have to consider the effect that the reduced fodder for the parasitic organisms will have if other plants usurp the resistance. Just because we consider some creature a pest because it eats our crops does not mean that it is not an important part of the ecosystem in which it lives. If we adversly change the niche that these insects have, we don't really know what the consequences are.
But I think that's the point of the article: we don't really know.
Slashdot Mirror
15 bit? That _is_ sick!
The scoop is that eukaryotes, like plants/animas/yeast/etc.---in other words, the more complex organisms that we see around us---are older than previously thought, 2.7 billion years instead 1.7 billion. The simpler prokaryotes like bacteria are still thought to have originated between 3.5 and 3.8 billion years ago. See the New York Times article for a better scoop. (free login required) -zook
Just a few points that I think could be missed:
;)
I think that Prof. Jones is probably on target when he says that it's unlikely that genetically modified food is harmful eat. Most of the modifications made to plants involve inserting naturally occuring genes into one plant or another to convey resistances, improve yield, etc. The question of whether these things are harmful is pretty much the same question we have to answer for any food. I mean, is corn good for you? It is a vegetable, but it's also quite high in fat. Neither naturally occuring corn, nor modified
corn will kill you outright, but there may be side concerns to worry about.
It seems quite concievable that these genes could be transfered from one species to another. Although two distantly related plants would not be able to share this information directly, there are alternate pathways by which genetic information could move across species. The issue of penicillin resistance is not just a case of convergent evolution among bacteria, but also involves the fact that bacteria redily conjugate, or trade DNA pieces. Furthermore, there are both viruses and bacteria that permanently change the DNA of the host organism by inserting a pice of genetic information into the hosts genomic DNA. It isn't that far fetched to imagine a case in which DNA was removed from one species and put into another by such a mechanism.
Finally, if we engineer a plant to be resistant to some insect parasite, it is true that things like polination should not be affected. But we have to consider the effect that the reduced fodder for the parasitic organisms will have if other plants usurp the resistance. Just because we consider some creature a pest because it eats our crops does not mean that it is not an important part of the ecosystem in which it lives. If we adversly change the niche that these insects have, we don't really know what the consequences are.
But I think that's the point of the article: we don't really know.
Just my 20 cents.
-zook