General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Article: 1st mouse by parthenogenesis?

Started by Robert Karl Sto · · Last activity · 6 posts · 497 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
25 April 2004
Last activity
25 April 2004
Original author
Robert Karl Sto
Posts
6
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
497
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–6 of 6
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. 1st mouse by parthenogenesis? Single gene knockout in dual
    maternal oocyte results in viable mice, but some doubt study
    By Cathy Holding

    A study published in the advance online publication of
    Nature today (April
    21) reports the first mouse created by parthenogenesis. But
    a leading researcher called the results very confusing,
    saying they raise more questions than answers.

    Tomohiro Kono and colleagues from the Tokyo University of
    Agriculture, Japan, report that they knocked out one allele
    of H19-a maternally expressed gene thought to function as A
    noncoding mRNA that blocks IN CIS the expression of Igf2-in
    an oocyte derived solely from two maternal genomes. A
    normally developed and viable parthenote resulted,
    suggesting a pivotal role for the paternally imprinted H19
    gene in allowing Igf2 expression from the paternal allele
    and controlling the requirement for a paternal genome,
    according to the authors.

    "When you put these two sets of chromosomes together
    functionally, the individual would have a father-like genome
    with the original mother genome, and therefore it works and
    gives rise to a live offspring," Patrick Tam, head of the
    embryology unit at the Children's Medical Research
    Institute, Westmead, Australia, who wrote an accompanying
    News and Views article, told The Scientist.

    In prior experiments, the Tokyo group had used a maternally
    imprinted genome and a neutral genome, which still proved to
    be lethal, according to Wolf Reik, head of developmental
    genetics and imprinting at the Babraham Institute in
    Cambridge, UK. "What they are trying to do now is convert
    the neutral genome into a paternal one by giving it this H19
    deletion allele, which allows the neutral genome to express
    Igf2-and this is clearly a key event that needs to happen
    here," said Reik, who was not involved in the study.

    But Rudolf Jaenisch, professor of biology at the Whitehead
    Institute and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
    Cambridge, US, found the paper flawed and confusing. "I
    really know this literature," he told The Scientist. "Igf2
    mutations-total knockout, no Igf2 whatsoever-gives you live
    mice and every mouse survives: they're all small." This
    suggests that expression of Igf2 is not an absolute
    requirement for normal embryonic development, according to
    Jaenisch, in contrast to the paper's results.

    Read the rest at The Scientist dot com
    biomedcentral.com01

    Posted by Robert Karl Stonjek.

  2. "Robert Karl Stonjek" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    A study published in the advance online publication of
    Nature today (April
    21) reports the first mouse created by parthenogenesis.

    H. sap. is toast. Males are dispensible in reproduction,
    female wombs are not, for the forseeable future.

    This prospect is breathtaking. As we recently learned
    news:<[email hidden]> there is some
    reason to believe that reducing the male to female ratio
    will have beneficial effects for the species. Less than a
    year ago, I somewhat facetiously advocated reducing the
    ratio to zero. "]news:[email hidden]
    Obviously, that would be impossible without coercion, and
    would increase our risk of extinction after a collapse of
    technology. But there is every possibility that, if politics
    does not intervene, the ratio will be reduced naturally and
    voluntarily, with every prospect of beneficial effects.

    Those baboon observations can be interpreted in a variety of
    ways, but it does seem to be clear that there is no "You
    gotta fight your way to the top, my son" gene - only a
    predisposition in males to acquire this MEME if the meme has
    reached a critical frequency in the population.

  3. Jim Menegay <[email hidden]> wrote or quoted:

    Quoted message said:

    "Robert Karl Stonjek" <[email hidden]> wrote in
    message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    A study published in the advance online publication of
    Nature today (April
    21) reports the first mouse created by parthenogenesis.


    Quoted message said:

    H. sap. is toast. Males are dispensible in reproduction,
    female wombs are not, for the forseeable future.

    I might add that recombination has some advantages - e.g. in
    the form of disease resistance.

    Cloning and parthenogenesis are not going to be a very
    competitive alternatives - since any large strains of clones
    will be vulnerable to attack by pathogens.

    That's unless sophisticated medicine is used - or unless the
    genetic engineers step in at the same time - and generate
    some variation of their own.

    That's pretty-much what has happened to most of the other
    organisms that adopted communal lifestyles, specialisation
    and division of labour.

    They wind up with large sterile armies and specialised
    reproductive parts.

    --
    __________
    |im |yler timtyler.orgtimtyler.org [email hidden] Remove
    lock to reply.

  4. Tim Tyler <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    Jim Menegay <[email hidden]> wrote or quoted:

    Quoted message said:

    "Robert Karl Stonjek" <[email hidden]> wrote in
    message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    A study published in the advance online publication of
    Nature today (April
    21) reports the first mouse created by
    parthenogenesis.


    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    H. sap. is toast. Males are dispensible in reproduction,
    female wombs are not, for the forseeable future.

    I might add that recombination has some advantages - e.g.
    in the form of disease resistance.

    Cloning and parthenogenesis are not going to be a very
    competitive alternatives - since any large strains of
    clones will be vulnerable to attack by pathogens.

    That's unless sophisticated medicine is used - or unless
    the genetic engineers step in at the same time - and
    generate some variation of their own.

    Quoted message said:


    That's pretty-much what has happened to most of the other
    organisms that adopted communal lifestyles, specialisation
    and division of labour.

    They wind up with large sterile armies and specialised
    reproductive parts.

    I think that Tim is misunderstanding what took place here
    (understandable, since the word "parthenogenesis" was used,
    inappropriately, I think.)

    This mouse has two mommies. The haploid genetic material
    from two unrelated egg cells were merged to form the zygote.
    Unlike with cloning, there can be recombination each
    generation - there is no particular reason to worry about
    pathogens. And, there need not be any sterile castes.

    One can imagine an equilibrium in which the H. sap.
    population is 75% female and 25% male and in which half of
    the female womb providers choose to use male codonors (with
    the offspring being a 50-50 mix of male and female) and half
    choose to use female codonors (with the offspring being
    female). Each male donates twice, each female gives

    provides equal payoff for parental investment.

  5. Actually, I think you are jumping the gun Jim. The last part
    of the article posted by RKS states "But Rudolf Jaenisch,
    professor of biology at the Whitehead Institute and the
    Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, US, found
    the paper flawed and confusing. "I really know this
    literature," he told The Scientist. "Igf2 mutations-total
    knockout, no Igf2 whatsoever-gives you live mice and every
    mouse survives: they're all small." This suggests that
    expression of Igf2 is not an absolute requirement for normal
    embryonic development, according to Jaenisch, in contrast to
    the paper's results." So if lgf2 is not an absolute
    requirement for normal embryonic development how did the
    Japanese researchers accomplish parthenogenesis? Well, its
    entirely possible if they didn't know what the hell they
    were doing that the results were not a product of
    parthenogenesis. In summary there are too many questions
    surrounding the validity of this study to accept it. More
    research duplicating the alledged parthenogenesis is needed.

    I disagree with you males are dispensable in reproduction
    but female wombs are not for the forseeable future. You
    realize if has been over half a century since there has been
    talk about ectogenesis and a person once told me it was even
    mentioned in the bible. Don't ask me where. I don't know. An
    Italian scientist tried such experiments but the results
    were deformed. But with the advances in prenatal care which
    can save such tiny sick babies and other advances it was
    safe to say in the "forseeable" future there will be
    artificial wombs. I can't provide an exact date but I
    imagine within the next 300 years they will exist.

    exist among [censored] Sapiens. Excuse me, what replaces them.
    Eggs can be extracted and stored as can sperm. And if
    parthenogenesis does ever

    dimorphism will vanish or be greatly altered. Our morphology
    will greatly change and these changes will not be primarily
    the result of natural selection but of genetic engineering
    and technology.

    In light of all this the ratio between males and females
    perhaps doesn't matter too much. In patriarchal societies
    the son is often favored but I don't see this as entirely a
    meme but also a product of Darwinian evolution. My
    understanding is there are more females than males so
    perhaps favoring the males is a balance of sorts.

    This is from Asia News:

    Based on government statistics there are 116 males for every
    100 females in China. But other sources have registered a
    ratio of 122 males to 100 females. Throughout most of the
    country there is a higher ratio of females to males, based
    on normal demographic trends and a greater survival rate of
    females at birth. Yet due to the practices of selective
    abortion and infanticide China (together with India) now
    is one of the major contributors to reversing this natural
    tendency.

    I doubt this natural tendency will be reversed. In other
    words, a higher ratio of males to females.

    Michael Ragland

    "Robert Karl Stonjek" <[email hidden]> wrote in
    message news:<[email hidden]>... A
    study published in the advance online publication of
    Nature today (April
    21) reports the first mouse created by parthenogenesis.

    H. sap. is toast. Males are dispensible in reproduction,
    female wombs are not, for the forseeable future. This
    prospect is breathtaking. As we recently learned
    news:<[email hidden]> there is some
    reason to believe that reducing the male to female ratio
    will have beneficial effects for the species. Less than a
    year ago, I somewhat facetiously advocated reducing the
    ratio to zero.   "]news:[email hidden]
    Obviously, that would be impossible without coercion, and
    would increase our risk of extinction after a collapse of
    technology. But there is every possibility that, if
    politics does not intervene, the ratio will be reduced
    naturally and voluntarily, with every prospect of
    beneficial effects. Those baboon observations can be
    interpreted in a variety of ways, but it does seem to be
    clear that there is no "You gotta fight your way to the
    top, my son" gene - only a predisposition in males to
    acquire this MEME if the meme has reached a critical
    frequency in the population.

  6. Jim Menegay <[email hidden]> wrote or quoted:

    Quoted message said:

    Tim Tyler <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    Jim Menegay <[email hidden]> wrote or quoted:

    Quoted message said:

    "Robert Karl Stonjek" <[email hidden]> wrote
    in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > A study published in the advance online publication
    > of Nature today (April
    > 21) reports the first mouse created by
    > parthenogenesis.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    H. sap. is toast. Males are dispensible in
    reproduction, female wombs are not, for the
    forseeable future.

    I might add that recombination has some advantages -
    e.g. in the form of disease resistance.

    Cloning and parthenogenesis are not going to be a very
    competitive alternatives - since any large strains of
    clones will be vulnerable to attack by pathogens. [...]

    Quoted message said:

    I think that Tim is misunderstanding what took place here
    (understandable, since the word "parthenogenesis" was
    used, inappropriately, I think.)

    Even the paper:

    ``Birth of parthenogenetic mice that can develop to
    adulthood''

    - calorierestriction.orgpmid

    ...uses the term.

    Probably marking the start of a debate about wether the egg
    was "fertilised" or not.
    --
    __________
    |im |yler timtyler.orgtimtyler.org [email hidden] Remove
    lock to reply.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.