If you haven't seen this article yet:
http://io9.com/5543843/scientists-create-artificial-life-%20-synthetic-d...
MAD SCIENCE
BY TIM BARRIBEAU MAY 21, 2010 6:30 AM 25,083
Scientists create "artificial life" – synthetic DNA that can self-replicate
In one of the biggest breakthroughs in recent history, scientists have created a synthetic genome that can self-replicate. So what does this mean? Are we about to become gray goo?
Led by Craig Venter of the J. Craig Venter Institute (JCVI), the team of scientists combined two existing techniques to transplant synthetic DNA into a bacteria. First they chemically synthesized a bacterial genome, then they used well-known nuclear transfer techniques (used in IVF) to transplant the genome into a bacteria. And apparently the bacteria replicated itself, too, thus creating a second generation of the synthetic DNA. The process is being hailed as revolutionary.
How to make a synthetic genome
Researchers created a synthetic genome by copying an existing one — Mycoplasma mycoides — and transplanting it into Mycoplasma capricolum. How can we be sure that the M. mycoides is synthetic? When recreating it, the team added a number of non-functional "watermarks" to the genome, making it distinct from the wild version. Once implanted, the M. mycoides genome "booted up" the recipient cells, deleting or disrupting 14 genes. The bacteria went on to function normally, meaning the transplant worked.
"This is the first synthetic cell that's been made, and we call it synthetic because the cell is totally derived from a synthetic chromosome, made with four bottles of chemicals on a chemical synthesizer, starting with information in a computer," said Venter. "This becomes a very powerful tool for trying to design what we want biology to do. We have a wide range of applications [in mind]."
"If the methods described here can be generalized, design, synthesis , assembly and transplantation of synthetic chromosomes will no longer be a barrier to the progress of synthetic biology," write the authors in the paper (available free online from Science).
Proof of concept
At present, this is a proof of concept, but has some immense potential for the future. The research team at JVCI have been working on this technology for approximately 15 years, and now have a number of possible organisms planned: an algae that would suck up carbon dioxide and excrete hydrocarbons for biofuels; faster vaccine production; water cleaning; and using light energy to create hydrogen gas from water.
As anyone with even a glancing familiarity with scifi knows, self-replicating technology could lead to disaster. JCVI have done their due diligence here, and all their engineered creations require nutrients found in the lab to survive. They also have the technology to create "suicide genes" that will prevent the synthetics from living outside of a controlled environment.
Aware of the ethical and security issues involved, JCVI has also been in talks with the U.S. government since 2003, as well as being reviewed by independent bioethics groups since 1997.
Ethics of synthetic life
So what does this all mean? Beyond the applications I already mentioned, it's also helping us understand how life works - specifically, how it's transmitted through DNA. "This is an important step we think, both scientifically and philosophically. It's certainly changed my views of the definitions of life and how life works," Venter said.
Nature has compiled a number of opinions from prominent academics on the project. Everyone acknowledges that this is just the first step in what could be a very interesting development.
"We now have an unprecedented opportunity to learn about life. Having complete control over the information in a genome provides a fantastic opportunity to probe the remaining secrets of how it works," says Mark Bedau of Reed College, Oregon. "A prosthetic genome hastens the day when life forms can be made entirely from non-living materials. As such, it will revitalize perennial questions about the significance of life — what it is, why it is important and what role humans should have in its future."
Jim Collins of Boston University reminds us that there's still much left we don't know:
Frankly, scientists do not know enough about biology to create life. Although the Human Genome Project has expanded the parts list for cells, there is no instruction manual for putting them together to produce a living cell. It is like trying to assemble an operational jumbo jet from its parts list - impossible. Although some of us in synthetic biology may have delusions of grandeur, our goals are much more modest.
There's a long way to go with this technology, but this advance is incredibly significant, and from it we may see the dawn of a new revolution in molecular biology and genetic engineering.
This concerns me. If scientists can create self-replicating DNA, it could fall into the wrong hands. If that happens, a Solanum-like virus could be created. Thus, Zombie Apocalypse. Thoughts?
Google DARPA and biodesign here is what you would find.
Taken directly from DARPAs 2011 budget:
BioDesign is a new intellectual approach to biological functionality. The intrinsic concept is that
by using gained knowledge of biological processes in combination with biotechnology and synthetic
chemical technology, humans can employ system engineering methods to originate novel beneficial
processes. BioDesign eliminates the randomness of natural evolutionary advancement primarily by
advanced genetic engineering and molecular biology technologies to produce the intended biological
effect. This thrust area includes designed molecular responses that increase resistance to cellular
death signals and improved computational methods for prediction of function based solely on sequence
and structure of proteins produced by synthetic biological systems. Development of technologies to
genetically tag and/or lock synthesized molecules would provide methods for identifying the origin
and source of synthetic biologicals (e.g., genes or proteins) allowing for traceability and prevention of
manipulation (“tamper proof” synthetic biological).
FY 2011 Base Plans:
- Demonstrate computation protein conformation algorithms that model one residue per minute with
99.5% accuracy for every one kilodalton of mass regardless of protein class.
- Develop conformation prediction algorithms for biomimetic polymers and biological-nonbiological
hybrids involving unnatural amino acids or inorganic materials.
- Demonstrate a robust understanding of the collective mechanisms that contribute to cell death.
- Identify and initiate strategies that would enable a new generation of regenerative cells that could
ultimately be programmed to live indefinitely until needed for an injury repair or therapeutic application.
- Develop genetically encoded locks to create "tamper proof" DNA and protect commercial
applications.
- Develop strategies to create a synthetic organism "self-destruct" option to be implemented upon
nefarious removal of organism.
- Permanently append a synthetic organism’s genome and prevent foul play by tracking organism use
and history, similar to a traceable serial number on a handgun.
We are all f***ed .
http://www.darpa.mil/Docs/FY2011PresBudget28Jan10%20Final.pdf
Member # 3014
Eliot said a naughty word!
~ There is no doubt that the powers that be are well beyond what is currently revealed through their mainstream media sources. That being said, Mankind in general should be far more concerned as to whether or not the THOUSANDS of bio-engineered weapons that not only our government but that other governments around the world create, ON A DAILY BASIS, will be eventually used upon the masses as their test subjects.
~ Once Life is created, whether naturally or artificially sentient, and to whatever degree it gains that intelligence, it MUST procreate/replicate... this holds true for _ALL_ living organisms. Computer viruses multiply of their own accord... why not synthetic DNA?
~ Like the name says... so I say to _YOU_: Be Pure, Be Vigilant, BEHAVE... ~
I see as somthing totaly posible to make zombie. If you read in the article its not self replicating DNA, it can self replicate DNA. The scientest say they have it contained to where it needs nutrients in the lab to servive. So what if this did get out, used a virus to kill our nerves and abillity to think for ourselves, Controlled our body and used our body to spread the Artifical inteligence and in the process obtained the nutrients to servive....we beter hope this stays contianed...
Z-prep;A7643
this is a tool.
it is as much of a tool as an axe. I can chop wood with it and keep fire in my house to prevent death by freezing.
aaaaaand... I can take the axe and walk into a retirement house or something making a new horror story of the mad axeman.
wrong hands have to be potent and have an aim to start something.
in this situation hands have to be very potent, must have a lot of knowledge and need to start a strain of research completely out of their mind. nothing alike has been done. as far as public knows of course.
so those hands need either total god-mode to make something happening as they have no clue what has to be done to make an efficient , resistant and contagious virus or microorganism that can shut down neural system or increase the impulses and make someone or something savage and brutally destructive. that would be potential the hands need.
but there is also the will to do so. and that is the question. could anyone aim for something alike?
you think an accident might happen.
I think there are so many circumstances to fall in place at the same time that the probability is close to none. not none, close to.
I fear scientists less than mother nature. for if scientist experimentates he has to documentate data. mother nature simply experimentates. if the experiment is a failure ... too bad off to the next experiment. and thus millions and millions of time a day. makes me wonder, if there are millions of tries and one in a millionth chance of success... well, seems interesting right?
I do think scientist salvaging a failure or win of mother nature and doing so for his own good is more dangerous than scientist trying to be mother nature. for science is potent but only as a child compared to a god in front of mother creator.
a maniac. with a machete. and another machete. and some knives. and some throwing knives. and some explosives. and some more explosives in his backpack
