rompergoddess Posted March 14, 2012 Report Share Posted March 14, 2012 This is ridiculous, and yet, at the same time it appeals to my 60's upbringing.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalebReich Posted March 14, 2012 Report Share Posted March 14, 2012 That's awesome! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmi7 Posted March 14, 2012 Report Share Posted March 14, 2012 Interesting but I would have to say they are dyed and hence shouldn't be bought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ckmullin Posted March 14, 2012 Report Share Posted March 14, 2012 Interesting but I would have to say they are dyed and hence shouldn't be bought. Agree...the only thing I've seen are glow in the dark various worms/flys and creatures of deep ocean. died (yes right spelling), not natural. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quetzalcoatl Posted March 14, 2012 Report Share Posted March 14, 2012 (edited) Isn't it possible to make all kind of glow in the dark critters by manipulating them genetically? I think I saw in the past everything from glowing flies to glowing cats :cry: Edited March 14, 2012 by Quetzalcoatl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ckmullin Posted March 14, 2012 Report Share Posted March 14, 2012 Perhaps. I know they want to bring the woolly mammoth back ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JORG Posted March 14, 2012 Report Share Posted March 14, 2012 I think a glow in the dark woolly mammoth would be a neat pet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvision Posted March 14, 2012 Report Share Posted March 14, 2012 They've replicated bioluminescence in just about every animal class now, so it is possible to get actual glowing fish by altering or adding a certain gene. However, it's a lot easier and cheaper just to use a needle and inject w a glowing dye, which is a lot more common, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayba Posted March 14, 2012 Report Share Posted March 14, 2012 (edited) I think a glow in the dark woolly mammoth would be a neat pet. I believe to see him glow, you would have to shave him naked, that sounds problematic. But I agree, it would be cool, I certainly don't have the back yard for one. too bad. lol These fish are genetically altered, not dyed as Jason stated. Edited March 14, 2012 by Jayba Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
425nm Posted March 14, 2012 Report Share Posted March 14, 2012 (edited) "Glow in the dark" is a misnomer. What is probably happening it fluroescence which is when a compund absorbs light of a particular wavelength (generally a shorter wavelength and therefore higher energy) which excites electrons causing them to jump to a higher energy level. These electrons eventually fall back down to their original energy level releasing energy in the form of photons of a lower energy (longer wavelength). So a light of a particular wavelength must first be shon on the fish/animal/structure in question for the flourescence to occur. They wouldn't "glow" in complete darkness. They certainly could have been genetically manipulated (sadly as Jvision pointed out its also possible that they have been injected as adults with a dye. This would be a lot cheaper.) In Science, Green Fluorescent Protein (originally isolated from jellyfish) is used for the visualization of gene expression. Basically you take the sequence GFP and you insert it into a gene (the actual process is obvious a bit more complicated than this, especially if you start from scratch) so that you can see how that gene works. It gives pretty pictures like these: http://ars.sciencedi...4008267-gr3.jpg When done in zebrafish, the embryos are often photographed because they're see through. The University has ~9000 zebrafish some of which have been engineered in similiar ways for different purposes (all justified exhaustively to ethics board). They also have some cool things like the casper strain zebrafish: http://images.caroli...l/155590_lo.jpg Which will probably never be avaible commercially. If it does become avaible commercially it means that some academic is going to loose all their grants and torn down by their home universities ethics commitee. Those angels have probably had GFP inserted in a gene involved in pigment/scale/irrophore (Numerous possibilities) deposition. This is ofcourse assuming they weren't just injected with a dye. As we all know the Canadian government has decided that using molecular techniques to create aquarium strain fish is unethical and has made it illegal to sell said fish. One of their concerns is that people will loose appreciation for the way natural fish look. Of course we all know it can have the opposite effect on some of us and make us only want wild type fish (I say wild type NOT wild caught). It shouldn't matter to you guys if they come directly from the wild so long as they look like their wild relatives. Taking fish from the wild can be extremely detrimental to the environmental (Rosaline sharks/Indian flasher barbs are now rather scarce in the wild). On the other hand, breeding fancy strains of fish achieve the same ends just much much slower. Flowerhorns are a good example. There are a few roadblocks to bringing back the whooly mammoth: 1) We have sequenced most of their genomes but this has been done from select few individuals and could be full of all sorts of deleterious mutations. 2) Their Y chromosome hasn't been sequenced (even in elephants). So they'd all be female. 3) The mammoth embryo would have to be implanted into a female elephant. This may or may not work, very high chance it would be rejected. No one is really sure. There are some other issues but these are what I can remember off the top of my head. Edited March 14, 2012 by 425nm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rompergoddess Posted March 14, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 14, 2012 yes, these are genetically modified, watched another video about it..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angel al Posted March 14, 2012 Report Share Posted March 14, 2012 Definitely...Not for me!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eugene Posted March 14, 2012 Report Share Posted March 14, 2012 YEAH I SAW THIS A FEW MONTHS AGO, COOL BUT UGLY LOOKING . Might be cool in a night club as a show tank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishnerd Posted March 15, 2012 Report Share Posted March 15, 2012 Dyed fish are gross... remember the glassfish 20yrs + ago ewwww however this GMO stuff is interesting ... Bring on the Mammoth !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
425nm Posted March 17, 2012 Report Share Posted March 17, 2012 So it turns out that despite the potential problems with cloning the mamoth there are actually three competing groups of scientists who are actually going to give it a go (including the fellow who cloned the first dog). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.