Craig Venter – you might remember him from such scientific headlines as the Human Genome Project – sure knows how to publicize his company’s research findings. ABC Online reports that Venter’s team has created “synthetic life”
Scientists in the United States have announced they have developed the world’s first synthetic living cell.
Alternatively, you could read the New York Times, which describes what Venter’s team has actually done:
Dr. Venter copied the DNA from one species of bacteria and inserted it into another. The second bacteria made all the proteins and organelles in the so-called “synthetic cell,” by following the specifications implicit in the structure of the inserted DNA.
“My worry is that some people are going to draw the conclusion that they have created a new life form,” said Jim Collins, a bioengineer at Boston University. “What they have created is an organism with a synthesized natural genome. But it doesn’t represent the creation of life from scratch or the creation of a new life form,” he said.
The New York Times article goes on to explain that while the work is a considerable technical achievement, other scientists contacted see it as a bit of a brute-force extension of methods already demonstrated on a smaller scale. Furthermore, it’s not clear whether this work will lead to anything closer to a “real” synthetic organism.
Lazy regurgitation of a press release aside, as a non-biologist it’s interesting to consider what synthetic life actually is, and what it might mean. It’s not difficult to imagine that at some time in the future the biologists will figure out how to assemble a working replica of a complete bacterium, or similarly simple organism, from scratch. From a philosophical standpoint, it might be a major achievement, but in practical terms it might be similar to the kids who put together radios from those kits they used to sell at Dick Smith Electronics – sure, you can build it, but can you fiddle around with the design to add some extra blue and red flashing LEDs?
As the NYT article hints, from a practical standpoint it’s probably more important to understand the varous bits of the genome, and how to assemble a custom one that has the features desired. Whether that gets put in an existing bacterium, or slotted into a newly-built one, doesn’t seem to have huge practical importance.
I recall Craig Venter’s name from the days when I was really interested in the prospects of using algae to express the lipid feedstock you’d need for biodiesel. I heard Venter speaking recently on BBC about the possibility of creating an algae that was 55% lipid and essentially gave up its lipids without the difficulty, time and energy losses associated with other extraction methods.
Presumably, it was one damned expensive micro-organism as I have heard no more about it.
It seems to me that microbiology is one of the really interesting frontiers, which, at least notionally, might help humanity with some very thorny problems. Wouldn’t it be great if you could make perishables 50% less perishable without refrigeration or if you could deliver anti-biotics or tumour-killing chemicals precisely where they were most useful and thus in much smaller doses.
The possibilities are tantalising, especially when you consider that our best scientists are not only still groping their way around how genes affect the operation of cells, but even more so, the epigenetic basis of cell behaviour.
People talk about how little we know of the cosmos, but I daresay that “inner-space” is quite as hard to get at.
I recall Craig Venter’s name from the days when I was really interested in the prospects of using algae to express the lipid feedstock you’d need for biodiesel. I heard Venter speaking recently on BBC about the possibility of creating an algae that was 55% lipid and essentially gave up its lipids without the difficulty, time and energy losses associated with other extraction methods.
Presumably, it was one damned expensive micro-organism as I have heard no more about it.
It seems to me that microbiology is one of the really interesting frontiers, which, at least notionally, might help humanity with some very thorny problems. Wouldn’t it be great if you could make perishables 50% less perishable without refrigeration or if you could deliver anti-biotics or tumour-killing chemicals precisely where they were most useful and thus in much smaller doses.
The possibilities are tantalising, especially when you consider that our best scientists are not only still groping their way around how genes affect the operation of cells, but even more so, the epigenetic basis of cell behaviour.
People talk about how little we know of the cosmos, but I daresay that “inner-space” is quite as hard to get at.
There is nothing in any of this. Synthetic life was created over half a century ago. It’s name is Kevin Rudd.
There is nothing in any of this. Synthetic life was created over half a century ago. It’s name is Kevin Rudd.
Synthetic humour created!
Synthetic humour created!
I understood that they didn’t just take DNA from one bacterium and stick it in another and get it to replicate. They did that 3 years ago.
I understood that they synthesised a new DNA out of bits of existing DNA from a variety of sources, and then stuck that into another bacterium.
The implication was that they had some control over the sequencing of the implanted genome, not just transferring DNA from one existing bacterium to another.
Even if they have control over the sequencing of the genome, I doubt they could know enough to manipulate the genome to achieve whatever difference they desire at the organism level.
But why not use brute force? Why do you need to design it? Instead, Synthesise a million subtly different genomes, and implant them all and then see if anything useful is produced. And it wouldn’t be totally random, they would have some knowledge about what genes are involved in what organism level features.
Imagine doing that with human DNA *shudder*. I think that if they synthesised a human DNA out of bits and pieces of various persons’ DNA, implanted it in a zygote, and then implanted the zygote in a womb, and the baby was successfully born, I would not necessarily call it a ‘new life form’, but I think I would be ok with calling it a synthetic human.
Same goes for bacteria. I think it is synthetic life and it is a synthetic bacteria – they might not have built the entire bacterium, but they have taken the blueprint and fiddled with that – that’s close enough for me to call it ‘synthetic’.
For me, the fact that they aren’t replicating the whole bacterium is not a reason to not be impressed.
I understood that they didn’t just take DNA from one bacterium and stick it in another and get it to replicate. They did that 3 years ago.
I understood that they synthesised a new DNA out of bits of existing DNA from a variety of sources, and then stuck that into another bacterium.
The implication was that they had some control over the sequencing of the implanted genome, not just transferring DNA from one existing bacterium to another.
Even if they have control over the sequencing of the genome, I doubt they could know enough to manipulate the genome to achieve whatever difference they desire at the organism level.
But why not use brute force? Why do you need to design it? Instead, Synthesise a million subtly different genomes, and implant them all and then see if anything useful is produced. And it wouldn’t be totally random, they would have some knowledge about what genes are involved in what organism level features.
Imagine doing that with human DNA *shudder*. I think that if they synthesised a human DNA out of bits and pieces of various persons’ DNA, implanted it in a zygote, and then implanted the zygote in a womb, and the baby was successfully born, I would not necessarily call it a ‘new life form’, but I think I would be ok with calling it a synthetic human.
Same goes for bacteria. I think it is synthetic life and it is a synthetic bacteria – they might not have built the entire bacterium, but they have taken the blueprint and fiddled with that – that’s close enough for me to call it ‘synthetic’.
For me, the fact that they aren’t replicating the whole bacterium is not a reason to not be impressed.
Sam, did you synthesize that opinion or did it just come to you?
Sam, did you synthesize that opinion or did it just come to you?
Excellent. It won’t be long now.
The first of the Six Portals has been opened; soon, the Herald of the Herald of Cthulhu shall herald the Herald of Cthulhu. Then Cthulhu shall herald Nyarlathotep, then…
Well none of this is easy you know. But if I were you, I wouldn’t make any hotel reservations beyond say next February.
Excellent. It won’t be long now.
The first of the Six Portals has been opened; soon, the Herald of the Herald of Cthulhu shall herald the Herald of Cthulhu. Then Cthulhu shall herald Nyarlathotep, then…
Well none of this is easy you know. But if I were you, I wouldn’t make any hotel reservations beyond say next February.
New Scientist says:
We certainly looking at something that could be a powerful tool for both good and evil – Both intended and accidental. It also weakens the argument of those that believe that “life” requires something magic to work.
New Scientist says:
We certainly looking at something that could be a powerful tool for both good and evil – Both intended and accidental. It also weakens the argument of those that believe that “life” requires something magic to work.
Any truth to the rumours that the main assistant was Igor? (that is pronounced eye-gore btw).
Any truth to the rumours that the main assistant was Igor? (that is pronounced eye-gore btw).
Sure – mock and sneer and snigger if you like. But let’s see if you’re still laughing in a few years’ time (9 to be precise) when a rogue Nexus 6 punches through your wall and breaks two of your fingers.
Sure – mock and sneer and snigger if you like. But let’s see if you’re still laughing in a few years’ time (9 to be precise) when a rogue Nexus 6 punches through your wall and breaks two of your fingers.
“It also weakens the argument of those that believe that “life” requires something magic to work.”
Not really.
There’s an old joke: some scientists say to God, Look, we’ve figured out how to create Life, so that puts on the same level as You, so we don’t need You any more.
Fine, says God. Let’s see you create Life.
It’s really simple, say the scientists. First, we take this petri dish full of dirt, and then…
Whoa, hold on, not so fast, says God. That’s mine. You create your own dirt.
“It also weakens the argument of those that believe that “life” requires something magic to work.”
Not really.
There’s an old joke: some scientists say to God, Look, we’ve figured out how to create Life, so that puts on the same level as You, so we don’t need You any more.
Fine, says God. Let’s see you create Life.
It’s really simple, say the scientists. First, we take this petri dish full of dirt, and then…
Whoa, hold on, not so fast, says God. That’s mine. You create your own dirt.
Nice, japerz.
If that joke ain’t Jewish, I’ll each my yarmulka.
Nice, japerz.
If that joke ain’t Jewish, I’ll each my yarmulka.
“Sure – mock and sneer and snigger if you like. But let’s see if you’re still laughing in a few years’ time (9 to be precise) when a rogue Nexus 6 punches through your wall and breaks two of your fingers.”
Well, you were trying to shoot it. Not very sporting to fire on an unarmed opponent!
“Sure – mock and sneer and snigger if you like. But let’s see if you’re still laughing in a few years’ time (9 to be precise) when a rogue Nexus 6 punches through your wall and breaks two of your fingers.”
Well, you were trying to shoot it. Not very sporting to fire on an unarmed opponent!
I’ll be to old to experience the kind of biological warfare this shit leaves us potentially open to. (Anybody remember Hiroshima?)
I’ll be to old to experience the kind of biological warfare this shit leaves us potentially open to. (Anybody remember Hiroshima?)
Biological warfare: it’s so much easier to fiddle around with existing pathogens to create a biological weapon than make a new one from scratch.
The whole idea of this project is that the genome they produced was synthesised completely from data in a computer, using basic building blocks. So, the team basically had control over the entire genome, and they inserted a few wacky sections which encoded the team’s names plus some funny quotes which they read back when sequencing much later generations of the organism.
So I guess this isn’t exactly synthetic life; it’s the first time a totally synthetic genome (which happens to be mostly that of a pre-existing organism (Mycoplasma mycoides) has been shown to work when inserted into a surrogate cell (they used baker’s yeast, in fact).
From here I’d say it’s relatively trivial (still v. expensive) to design a synthetic genome to do whatever kind of chemical processing they want (the red and blue flashing LEDs, although blue LEDs are a pretty recent invention, so let’s make that red and green flashing LEDs).
Biological warfare: it’s so much easier to fiddle around with existing pathogens to create a biological weapon than make a new one from scratch.
The whole idea of this project is that the genome they produced was synthesised completely from data in a computer, using basic building blocks. So, the team basically had control over the entire genome, and they inserted a few wacky sections which encoded the team’s names plus some funny quotes which they read back when sequencing much later generations of the organism.
So I guess this isn’t exactly synthetic life; it’s the first time a totally synthetic genome (which happens to be mostly that of a pre-existing organism (Mycoplasma mycoides) has been shown to work when inserted into a surrogate cell (they used baker’s yeast, in fact).
From here I’d say it’s relatively trivial (still v. expensive) to design a synthetic genome to do whatever kind of chemical processing they want (the red and blue flashing LEDs, although blue LEDs are a pretty recent invention, so let’s make that red and green flashing LEDs).
I reckon this discovery brings hope to our world. We might be able to create a neo-human, one that doesn’t carry the genetic baggage that we do.
Just imagine if you can, a neo-human that has no interest in violence, war or greed; no interest in raping the neighbour’s wife or having sex with his own children; no interest in competing with others or spending a lifetime being a meaningless producer and consumer; no interest in exploiting the natural world, etc.
Imagine a world full of neo-humans, each one of whom has a mind that actually thinks, who is happy, content, warm, compassionate, generous, loving, honest, altruistic, artistic, humble…well, you get the picture. Bring them on, I say.
What do we do with the current crop of dodgy, primitive, indoctrinate humans?
Have you heard about the dinosaurs?
I reckon this discovery brings hope to our world. We might be able to create a neo-human, one that doesn’t carry the genetic baggage that we do.
Just imagine if you can, a neo-human that has no interest in violence, war or greed; no interest in raping the neighbour’s wife or having sex with his own children; no interest in competing with others or spending a lifetime being a meaningless producer and consumer; no interest in exploiting the natural world, etc.
Imagine a world full of neo-humans, each one of whom has a mind that actually thinks, who is happy, content, warm, compassionate, generous, loving, honest, altruistic, artistic, humble…well, you get the picture. Bring them on, I say.
What do we do with the current crop of dodgy, primitive, indoctrinate humans?
Have you heard about the dinosaurs?
Don’t these people know about the archetype of the overreacher? Prometheus, Icarus, Faust, Frankenstein?
Tch.
Don’t these people know about the archetype of the overreacher? Prometheus, Icarus, Faust, Frankenstein?
Tch.
Probably not, Pollyana. But when the Monster wakes up …
David G,
Lovely vision. Reminds me of H. G. wells’ Time Machine.
Probably not, Pollyana. But when the Monster wakes up …
David G,
Lovely vision. Reminds me of H. G. wells’ Time Machine.
Within a 30 or 40 generations or something like that the bacteria essentially becomes fully synthetic. That is, all its cellular components are synthesised from instructions from its synthetic genome and aren’t remnants of the unmodified bacteria that the new genome was inserted into.
The genome itself is fully synthetic. It was made up of individual ‘A’s, ‘C’s, ‘T’s and ‘G’s synthesised into short sequences of the correct order by a machine. Then, through lots of hard work, all the strands were assembled into a complete genome.
To demonstrate the process is possible, it makes sense to use the genome of another bacterium as a template as any problems that eventuate are due to the process and not a problem in the genome design. Once the process has been sorted, which it has, putting whatever DNA sequences that takes your fancy is simple in comparison, and in a few years I’d expect groups all over the world will be doing it (just as genome sequencing is now common).
The idea of designing a fully functioning synthetic genome from scratch doesn’t make a lot of sense when there’s evolved and functioning sequence information available from all life on earth. Better to use, mix and modify that.
Venter’s team’s achievement is amazing and is deserving of the coverage it is getting.
Within a 30 or 40 generations or something like that the bacteria essentially becomes fully synthetic. That is, all its cellular components are synthesised from instructions from its synthetic genome and aren’t remnants of the unmodified bacteria that the new genome was inserted into.
The genome itself is fully synthetic. It was made up of individual ‘A’s, ‘C’s, ‘T’s and ‘G’s synthesised into short sequences of the correct order by a machine. Then, through lots of hard work, all the strands were assembled into a complete genome.
To demonstrate the process is possible, it makes sense to use the genome of another bacterium as a template as any problems that eventuate are due to the process and not a problem in the genome design. Once the process has been sorted, which it has, putting whatever DNA sequences that takes your fancy is simple in comparison, and in a few years I’d expect groups all over the world will be doing it (just as genome sequencing is now common).
The idea of designing a fully functioning synthetic genome from scratch doesn’t make a lot of sense when there’s evolved and functioning sequence information available from all life on earth. Better to use, mix and modify that.
Venter’s team’s achievement is amazing and is deserving of the coverage it is getting.
Just imagine if you can, a neo-human that has no interest in violence, war or greed; no interest in raping the neighbour’s wife or having sex with his own children;
Still male by default, though, I see.
Just imagine if you can, a neo-human that has no interest in violence, war or greed; no interest in raping the neighbour’s wife or having sex with his own children;
Still male by default, though, I see.
Helen, I guess I see that males are responsible for most of the unpleasantness and strife in the world. Surely even you would cede that!
Helen, I guess I see that males are responsible for most of the unpleasantness and strife in the world. Surely even you would cede that!
Take it away Comrade Valerie:
Take it away Comrade Valerie:
Liam, just as Helen did, you took part of what I said and presented that as the whole!
But on L.P. this happens often even among those with degrees!
Liam, just as Helen did, you took part of what I said and presented that as the whole!
But on L.P. this happens often even among those with degrees!
If we could sequence out misanthropy, that’d be a start.
If we could sequence out misanthropy, that’d be a start.
I reckon it’s only people who live cloistered lives in places like Melbourne or Sydney who think that misanthropy doesn’t or shouldn’t exist.
People who keep up with world affairs realize that humans, in the main, are pretty dodgy (some are downright evil) and deserving of misanthropic comments.
I reckon it’s only people who live cloistered lives in places like Melbourne or Sydney who think that misanthropy doesn’t or shouldn’t exist.
People who keep up with world affairs realize that humans, in the main, are pretty dodgy (some are downright evil) and deserving of misanthropic comments.
Well I don’t know David. Imagine a race of neo-human atomic supermen who felt they actually had to be accountable for the things they’ve actually written.
Wouldn’t that be just whiskey-and-kittens?
Well I don’t know David. Imagine a race of neo-human atomic supermen who felt they actually had to be accountable for the things they’ve actually written.
Wouldn’t that be just whiskey-and-kittens?
“Just imagine if you can, a neo-human that has no interest in violence, war or greed; no interest in raping the neighbour’s wife or having sex with his own children; no interest in competing with others or spending a lifetime being a meaningless producer and consumer; no interest in exploiting the natural world, etc.”
“Imagine a world full of neo-humans, each one of whom has a mind that actually thinks,”
I think that the 2nd quote is quite possibly incompatible with the first. The neo-human you describe in the first para seems pretty mindless and unthinking to me, to the extent that such behaviour is designed rather than decided.
“Just imagine if you can, a neo-human that has no interest in violence, war or greed; no interest in raping the neighbour’s wife or having sex with his own children; no interest in competing with others or spending a lifetime being a meaningless producer and consumer; no interest in exploiting the natural world, etc.”
“Imagine a world full of neo-humans, each one of whom has a mind that actually thinks,”
I think that the 2nd quote is quite possibly incompatible with the first. The neo-human you describe in the first para seems pretty mindless and unthinking to me, to the extent that such behaviour is designed rather than decided.
@David G
Choosing to address just a quoted portion of a comment says nothing about “the whole”. That’s what quoting is for!
If they gave you those answers without quoting just one portion, then you’d have some sort of point.
@David G
Choosing to address just a quoted portion of a comment says nothing about “the whole”. That’s what quoting is for!
If they gave you those answers without quoting just one portion, then you’d have some sort of point.
Yes, while we are at it, it’s the exclamation marks. If you are going to be misanthropic, Pyzo, do it without all the excitement. As it stands, it’s like you are skipping through a field singing “the hills are alive etc etc” every time you do your thing, and then sounding completely shocked! and surprised! by the depths of your own misery! No need to have it sound so completely unhinged. Choose the minor key for your dirges, David.
Yes, while we are at it, it’s the exclamation marks. If you are going to be misanthropic, Pyzo, do it without all the excitement. As it stands, it’s like you are skipping through a field singing “the hills are alive etc etc” every time you do your thing, and then sounding completely shocked! and surprised! by the depths of your own misery! No need to have it sound so completely unhinged. Choose the minor key for your dirges, David.
Oh, no! The usual incestuous flock of small-minded L.P. vultures are gathering. Soon there will be a feeding frenzy and blood on the floor. Mine!
(Exits stage right and runs for his life).
Oh, no! The usual incestuous flock of small-minded L.P. vultures are gathering. Soon there will be a feeding frenzy and blood on the floor. Mine!
(Exits stage right and runs for his life).
Stumbles, sets own pants on fire with lightsabre, curses black market mitochlorian dealer. A bad batch – again!
Stumbles, sets own pants on fire with lightsabre, curses black market mitochlorian dealer. A bad batch – again!
[Ahem] a vulture doesn’t eat anything with fresh blood
[Ahem] a vulture doesn’t eat anything with fresh blood
He looks like a zombie to me, Liam.
He looks like a zombie to me, Liam.
Liam, do you ever get anything right?
“Vultures seldom attack healthy animals, but may kill the wounded or sick.”
Source: Wiki.
Liam, do you ever get anything right?
“Vultures seldom attack healthy animals, but may kill the wounded or sick.”
Source: Wiki.
David,
You out of all of us might appreciate this:
I mean watch it. I dunno why you are so down on your kind when your kind is capable of that and more.
Srsly
David,
You out of all of us might appreciate this:
I mean watch it. I dunno why you are so down on your kind when your kind is capable of that and more.
Srsly
Fair point, well made, David G. That’ll teach me.
Fair point, well made, David G. That’ll teach me.
If you read John Sulston’s autobiography it’s pretty clear that Venter regards these as his role models.
If you read John Sulston’s autobiography it’s pretty clear that Venter regards these as his role models.
What are the real-world examples of the overeacher? Why should knowledge of these fictional characters preclude this kind of research, rather than merely serve as a warning to researchers to be careful instead? Are the researchers not being careful?
Here is some good commentary on these events, see the Daniel Dennett commentary for a cautious view.
What are the real-world examples of the overeacher? Why should knowledge of these fictional characters preclude this kind of research, rather than merely serve as a warning to researchers to be careful instead? Are the researchers not being careful?
Here is some good commentary on these events, see the Daniel Dennett commentary for a cautious view.